This has been very interesting and it really made me realize how backwards so many people are thinking (not you, Mikey, it just happened your comment was above mine...).

When you look at so many successful marathon runners in history, be it Frank Shorter, Rod Dixon, Steve Jones, Geb... It's not like they woke up one day and thought; "I want to run a marathon," and started running 20+ miles. While they were a track runner, be it 10000m or 5000m...or in the case of Rod, even 1500m, they all had been running 20-miles in training. So when they decided to run a marathon, they didn't really change much of their training (a bit). It is not that they were training for a marathon that they started doing long runs; they'd been doing long runs all along because it's beneficial.

By the way, the only thing that I may disagree with other knowledgable folks is to go by distance; be it 16 miles or 18 miles or...10 miles. I think anybody would benefit from a 2-hour run, whatever the distance that you carry yourself within that time frame. 1:30 is fine. 2:00 is better. Anywhere between 2:00 and 3:00, you'll get tremendous physiological gains (and I don't want to go in detail with this--I think other thread had taken care of that).

My goodness, I don't think I ever want to slog through 20 miles miles ever again in my life. If I can't run 20 at a good, snappy pace, then I don't want to run 20. If I need to run 20 to race the marathon well, and I can only run them slowly, then perhaps I'm not ready for the marathon.

I came to this conclusion, not from a bad 20-miler, but from a really nice 15-mile run this weekend. I was with some faster guys. We took it at about 20-30s/mile faster than I do when I'm running alone. It was fabulous.

My goodness, I don't think I ever want to slog through 20 miles miles ever again in my life. If I can't run 20 at a good, snappy pace, then I don't want to run 20. If I need to run 20 to race the marathon well, and I can only run them slowly, then perhaps I'm not ready for the marathon.

+1

This is why, after spending my first year as a runner trying to attack the marathons I was not ready for, I am shifting the focus to shorter distances for a while.

Doesn't mean I'm not running long, but I think it's something I wish I would have thought about a year earlier in my short running career.

"When a person trains once, nothing happens. When a person forces himself to do a thing a hundred or a thousand times, then he certainly has developed in more ways than physical. Is it raining? That doesn't matter. Am I tired? That doesn't matter, either. Then willpower will be no problem." Emil Zatopek

FlatFT.runner

posted: 12/20/2012 at 1:34 PMmodified: 12/20/2012 at 1:38 PM

I do appreciate all the replies and a few of them have me in deep thought about this idea. First I have to admit one reason I thought of doing this was that a couple years ago I ran my fastest half marathon ever, problem was it was during a full marathon . I wondered ever since why not?. I have the time and I actually won't run more then 17-18 miles for my long run but other then that Actually I've been running between 14 - 16 miles for long run on weekends recently and I'm not training for anything at the moment. I think the added miles during the week must have helped. I have not made up my mind yet but think I'll get out daniels and Pfitz this weekend and maybe come up with something I like that's close to training for a full and see what happens.

Background: 61 years old, running for 6 years, 7 half marathons no marathon.

I ran my best half after deciding a marathon program would allow me to be better prepared and run harder. My aim was to set a time I could brag about which would be a lifetime PB as my advancing age would slow me down each year.

I used Pfitz 18/55 plan, though I cut a few runs short and missed a few of the striders at the end of some runs. I did run 20 miles once in about 3:07, and peaked at 50 miles, with several weeks at 40-45 miles.

I ran a big PB, 1:37:22, with my slowest 5k split only 1:09 slower than my PB for that distance.

I would recommend it, partly because it worked for me, partly because I am sure most runners under train for all their (our) races.

I too am taking a similar approach as I have used Pfitz 18/70 plan for my last two marathon training cycles. At the end of the most recent one, I set a PR for my marathon time (not that I had set the bar high in my prior effort), but I also set a PR for my 10K time two weeks prior in a tune up and a 15K two weeks after. So I am a definite believer that the extra miles are only going to help baring injury.

So as long as you can do the additional volume and not injure yourself or burn yourself out, I would see it as a positive. I plan to keep on this course as well for my upcoming early spring half. I hope that my body will see this as the new norm and adjust allowing to me to follow a potential more aggressive training schedule mileage and pace wise potentially for my next marathon effort.

My goodness, I don't think I ever want to slog through 20 miles miles ever again in my life. If I can't run 20 at a good, snappy pace, then I don't want to run 20. If I need to run 20 to race the marathon well, and I can only run them slowly, then perhaps I'm not ready for the marathon.

I came to this conclusion, not from a bad 20-miler, but from a really nice 15-mile run this weekend. I was with some faster guys. We took it at about 20-30s/mile faster than I do when I'm running alone. It was fabulous.

Thank you!!

I would have gone on and on and on but you just summarized what I've been trying to say over posts after posts after posts in for quite some time. If "survival marathon" is your goal, nothing wrong with it; all the power to you. But trying to go 20s no matter what AND expect to do well is not the right approach. You're gone waaaay past the trade-off point.

Is that what Coach Jeff had taught you or you learnt it from your experience? ;o)

Highly trained athlete, like Spaniel did as he said something about doing a 4-hour run on treadmill, can do a super long run like that and bounce back and do an hour's fartlek the next day. Us poorly-conditioned people would have to take 4 or 5 days before we even lace up our running shoes.

I WISH I had that kind of recovery ability.

Ten years ago it was a day in between hard workouts; now it is two. A four hour run....I'm just glad I could walk normally today.

And, when I say a 16 miler for HM training that's pretty much in line with your 2 hour recommendation. An easy 16-miler for me is in the low-1:50s. But without the 20-23 milers of marathon training in there....I throw in enough work to get it under 1:40 sometimes. So not all long runs are created equal, which is another complexity to throw into the equation.

"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

... But without the 20-23 milers of marathon training in there....I throw in enough work to get it under 1:40 sometimes. So not all long runs are created equal, which is another complexity to throw into the equation.

(Emphasis added by me)

I ran my second 8mi this afternoon at goal-MP. That's not that fast, but, it left me a bit sore immediately afterward. I'm very much hoping that it makes today's "long run" more beneficial to me. In fact, I didn't view it as a long run at all, but as a long prelude to an MP run.